TRIPARTITE

ESSENTIALISM

A GRAND UNIFYING THEORY

By ANDREW HENNESSEY (1991, 2003, 2013)

1

INDEX TRE INTRODUCTION – 003

ASSUMPTIONS OF TRE – 007

MODELLING WITH TRE – 011

TRE OPERATING SYSTEM – 020

KNOWLEDGE REPRESENTATION SYSTEM – 024

THE METALANGUAGE [T] – 026

LOGIC LANGUAGE [HX] – 028

EXAMPLE OF [HX] – 030

TRE EXPERT SYSTEM – 037

THE HALTING PROBLEM – 039

LOGICAL ATOMISM – 043

ISOMORPHISM BETWEEN DOMAINS – 047

NEW PHYSICAL THEORIES (CHAOS) – 053

INTERDIMENSIONAL COSMOLOGY - 056

2

AN INTRODUCTION TO TRIPARTITE RELATIVITY - TRE

Andrew Hennessey, born in Edinburgh, Scotland, began investigating relativity and holism in the late 1970’s and by 1991 had formulated many of the concepts of Tripartite Essentialism or TRE. Andrew draws parallels to Nikola Tesla’s ‘Theory of Environmental Energy’ circa 1900 and also to the Logical Atomism of Bertrand Russell also circa 1900. TRE is both a physical and metaphysical General Systems Theory that is based in Chaos Theory and flux, the natural order of the physical cosmos, and it is also a metaphysics that maps out logically every exchange within and between objects within this cosmic flux at all scales and magnitudes. This metaphysics, rooted in Logical Atomism (Russell and Wittgenstein, circa 1910), is programmable. 1. THE PHYSICAL THEORY The physical theory is aether-based and assumes absolute chaos and contends as in finger-prints, that universally in physical chaos no two objects are identical at any scale. Similar objects belong to a classification of similar behaviours of similar objects with similar properties. The criteria for attributing an object to a set of similarly behaving but physically different objects is then socially agreed upon. The physical theory of TRE – and its particle physics (Harmonic Continuum Theory) models a solution to the quantum paradox – the collapsing wave paradox. It also predicts that there is no basic ‘identical’ building block or ‘God particle’ because objects in chaos and aether are infinitely divisible. We just don’t have the scientific apparatus to look deep enough for smaller and smaller particle events. Also the TRE physics predicts that there is no absolute ‘Big Bang’ and ‘Big Crunch’ and that because of the Chaos law of ‘Emergence’ there will be no ‘heat death’ because Emergence and its process of reconstruction counteracts the Entropy of the Second Law of Thermodynamics. The physical theory also predicts that atoms and particles organically mutate and that free energy comes from the chaos law of ‘emergence’ as adjacent dimensions constantly push new harmonically structured turbulence events (sub-atomic particles) into this reality that then become constrained in size by local densities. It predicted in 2003, now verified that black holes could create and eject new stars. Probably because adjacent connecting dimensions are

3

capable of chaotically altering the density of their aethers and thereby occasionally reversing their flow where they connect at the black hole. It also predicts that time is a field-effect of mass and that it is equivalent to gravity. Further TRE predicts that time is non-linear, that the speed of light is not a constant, but a local phenomena, and that Planck’s constant – the alleged fixed distance between shells in a particle is also only local behaviour and not universal. Indeed TRE would assert that there are no universal constants , just locally mutating phenomena recognised to be within certain parameters with certain equipment in a certain time frame. TRE particle theory has all particles from the smallest sub-atomic at all scales as constrained to produce internal structure and be guided in size by activity and pressure within the local cosmic aether. At this moment in time in the 21st Century, there is every indication from published scientific results that there is a detailed and significant correlation between the physical theory of TRE and the TRE metaphysical process descriptions, and that as a general systems theory – the unity of physics and metaphysics proposed is not based on the arbitrary. 2. THE PROGRAMMABLE METAPHYSICS MODEL With everything in the absolutely chaotic universe in a state of flux, the most basic, atomic and logical model of an exchange is between A and B through some common C with the intercession in natural chaos of at least some D. The three dimensional universe of chaos and flux is absolutely comprised of such atomic and logical exchanges. The Tripartite Essentialism, TRE, model of the physical universe attributes a series of limited (essentialist) numbers to events taking place between and within objects. The essentialist TRE numbers themselves however are then further related to empirical measurements and Scientific units of measure that delineate the scale and activity of energies, transactions and events within the physical context of each object in flux. A TRE number therefore has information both about the integrity of transactions and also about the physical scale, behaviour and nature of the context of the object it relates to. TRE numbers on their own therefore are merely Boolean Arithmetic pertaining to a generic logical exchange ABC, but it is the addition of empirical data that creates the specific picture of an objects behaviour and performance. There are only 8 logical ways to describe the integrity of an object or system involved in an ABC exchange at time 1, and at time 2 there are in

4

total 64 logical outcomes that depict the integrity of any ABC exchange, because the 8 versions at time 1 can be one from any other of the 8 at time 2. (8 times 8 = 64) This is Language [T] By introducing natural chaos and modality into the exchange process, Language [A] there are then a total of 27 state descriptions that describe every possible variation of the integrity of an exchange between two objects ABC at time 1. This set of 27 state descriptions includes the 8 logically real ones of [T], at time 1, but adds a further set of 19 logical (transitional) modalities. Hence at time 2 in an ABCD exchange 27 times 27 produces 729 state descriptions of any exchange in the universe at time 2. This limited and closed set of essentialist arithmetic with 729 (or also 64) components produces a finite number for infinity which enables advanced computation to circumvent the Halting Problem (Turing, Church). The closed and limited set of essentialist numbers in TRE ie. (64 or 729) that enumerate every possible description of the integrity of an exchange between A and B through some common C, means that there is a finite measuring stick, a scale of relationships upon which to base intelligent computation. A computational system utilising a TRE numbering strategy would overcome the Halting paradox which currently prevents functional Artificially Intelligent computing. It is currently only AI computers that utilise an infinity of object labels that are favoured by public domain industry. As these machines cannot process infinite possibilities they fail to find the significance of the endless labels they are processing and cannot resolve issues. A TRE computer though is not working with an infinity of object labels but a finite and limited set of transactions within all objects – it has no halting problem. A TRE computer is working not with labels but with the elements of objects in the same way that the infinity of the physical cosmos and its endless diversity can be described by the finite number of elements in a periodic table of chemistry. For every and any event therefore there is an ABC exchange with the intercession of some D. This logical fact is the most basic component of any exchange in the cosmos and we can say of any ABC(D) exchange that at any time1, part A is integrated and contributing, or disintegrated and not contributing, or doing neither – basically 1 or 0 or A The same for part B and part C of the ABC(D) exchange between two objects. What part A, B and C refer to is decided by the observer who supplies the context and empirical values of the exchange being observed. There are many ways that any object or event could be described or observed in the universe in terms of the ABC exchanges it uses in both its internal and external structure, but it is the observer who gives context for event modelling and the physical criteria of the observations.

5

A logical programming language similar to PROLOG called HX Assembler was developed to enable computer modelling and mapping of the physical cosmos, objects and their environments, with TRE metaphysics. This metaphysics and modelling can enable accurate data exchange between very different maps and hence solve a major problem in Artificial Intelligence. That is TRE provides ‘isomorphism between domains’ – a process that would enable an artificially intelligent machine to use analogies from other kinds of knowledge to solve unknowns in a different problem area. This Tripartite model at the heart of every object at any scale in the cosmos was further developed into a general systems description that could be universally applied to every object. This is called 6 Keys Systems Theory and with this basic atomic model, every object in the cosmos could be divided into nested zones and its intricacies modelled for computing purposes. TRE although an R&D project does overcome the major paradoxes at the heart of Robotics; namely the ‘Halting problem’ (Turing, Church) and also Goedel’s ‘Logical numbering incompleteness paradox’ TRE therefore in a fully developed state would be at the heart of a major industrial revolution in Information Technology. For the purposes of computation there is a way to represent Knowledge about every Universal object in a Tripartite format of the kind;

1. OBJECT, MACRO (Context measurements and ingredients) 2. PROCESS, MESO (internal structure) 3. QUALITY, MICRO (outcome or asset)

By giving every object in our Knowledge Representation database three attributes like these we can start to create a scientific picture about the performance of objects for computation purposes. This three part system also maps onto our use of natural language where; Object is a Noun, Process is a Verb and Quality is an Adjective. By using data gathering strategies like these it is possible to map and model with lots of non-TRE data which would ultimately boost TRE project outcomes. TRE technology – based on its closed set of essentialist arithmetic could be the basis for a myriad of StarTrek technologies including; teleportation, scanning, long range cosmic travel, matter transmutation and executive robotics.

6

The fundamental assumptions of Tripartite Essentialism’s Physical Cosmology - new technologies

Tripartite Essentialism is a general systems theory built upon a set of assumptions and is a description of a system of interactions of natural laws. From the following assumptions about the state and behaviour of the natural universe which constitutes a new physical theory of relativity it becomes possible to map these physical exchanges by overlaying a programmable metaphysics 1. The universe is in a state of absolute chaos and flux in both the macrocosm and the microcosm. 2. Order emerges out of chaos. [fusion] a Natural Law 3. Chaos emerges out of order. [entropy and fission] 4. Energy and matter and component particles can be described by wave theory, turbulence and the standing waves or particles take on harmonic and octal attributes. 5. There are no fixed universal constants in the macrocosm. 6. There are no fixed identical particles just classes of particle events with similar properties 7. All energy and matter is in a state of transference from high energy to low energy across a common medium i.e. A to B through C with the minimal intercession of some D. there are 8 logically real versions of the integrity of that transaction at time1 and 64 at time2, further there are 27 modal logic/transitional states at time1 and 729 at time2 8. This transference can be universally modelled by an inverse square power law. 9. Every material and ergonomic system and event is unique but can be classified according to similar properties.

7

http://offtheplanet.blogspot.com/2011/08/fundamental-assumptions-of-tripartite.htmlhttp://offtheplanet.blogspot.com/2011/08/fundamental-assumptions-of-tripartite.html

10. a. General Systems Theory called Tripartite Essentialism models every transference event outwith considerations of scale. b. Complex systems and objects can be modelled as being comprised of many simple tripartite interactions. 11. Tripartite Essentialism labels every system in the Universe with 3 attributes: 1. Ingredients [macro] 2. internal mechanics [meso] 3. qualitative [micro] 12. Every physical system has three components and each of the three components has 2 attributes. 1. Endogenous 2. Exogenous - and this produces a total of six inverse-square power laws inter-relationships with which to model every event in the material Universe. 13. Relativism and the power of analogy can strip away arbitrary labels and expose and model the physical exchanges and processes that characterise every system at every scale. 14. A transfer of energy between two points or systems via a common intervening medium is a process called Osmosis. [a Universal state of affairs i.e. some A to some B through some common C] 15. The most basic and tautologically true of an infinite number of transfers of energy in the Cosmos of 3 dimensions of space and one of time is that between at least two systems. e.g. Dr Plichta's model of Tripartite Relativity ISBN 1-86204-014-1, pub element 1997 demonstrates that 3'ness is an archetypal and a priori state with the mathematics of prime numbers, and demonstrates that Structure emerges and evolves out of mathematical chaos. 16. This one basic transfer within and between all objects through a common medium of exchange can be modelled by science in several ways. a. Osmosis. i.e. The diffusion of a high concentration to an area of lower concentration through a semi-permeable membrane also as Fajan's Rules of atomic Chemistry applied to the migration of electrons. b. As a metaphysically continuous extension of one system into another, where the second system 'Emerges' out of the potential created by the activity of the first. e.g. Morphogenetic Attractor [Langton C], Evolutionary Vacancy [Goodwin B] - as a Field in Psychology [Lewin K] and electricity [Ohm's Law, incorporating potential difference of energies as Voltage and resistance to the passage of energy from high to low potential.] and in Physical Chemistry, Fajans rules.

8

c. The relationship between the two systems can be empirically modelled by an inverse square power law i.e. The more one system increases in magnitude, the more the effect of the other system diminishes in turn. This can be more attenuated and imprecise at increasingly larger scales of relativity of mass. d. A binary and tripartite arithmetic, can be used to model this transaction, where system A, system B and the common medium system C have a holistic relativity which can be represented as integrated or disintegrated in whole or part by 1's or 0's denoting on/off, extant/disabled [Boole G]. e. At any time 1, there can be eight essential states of that Tripartite Relativity. These 'essences' or 'atomic state descriptions' at time 2 can be any of the other eight. The number of possibilities for changes of state is modelled by a closed set of 64. 17. From this metaphysics can be derived an Essentialist Arithmetic with an unusual concept of zero, for zero in this system always has substance in relation to some context (unlike the Frege definition of decimal numbers by an empty set) i.e. There is no absolute zero, and infinity is always a finite essentialist number in a limited and closed set. (This makes intelligent computing possible because the universe can be mapped without recourse to an infinity of labels. (the Turing Halting Problem and also in Goedel's logical numbers) and domain maps of the universe made up from essentialist arithmetic and its TRE metaphysics maps without infinity are easily interchangeable - so that an AI is never stuck enumerating an infinity of labels. 18. The Cosmos and its energies are in a state of Chaos, and emerge systems that are ordered, but all energy and all matter and all time have the characteristics of Chaos - they are Non-Linear, both in the Macrocosm and the Microcosm. [Alexanders's Horned paradox in mathematical topology.] A Chaos, harmonic and Fluid dynamics paradigm 19. The properties of emergence modelled here, are Telic. i.e. end based and suggests that Emergence doesn't stop at causing system 2, but that successive systems emerge as part of an ongoing process. 20. Entropy and demergence are part of this dualistic process of Emergence, construction and destruction, but it is suggested [Langton and Kauffman in Levy S.] that this process of expansion and contraction occurs around a tendency to equilibrium e.g. the elements of Chemistry tend to transitional equilibrium states. These states may also be considered to be Complex states at the Edge of Chaos and the Edge of Structure and are self evolving and self-regulating. 21. There is a formal logic for the set of Essences producing various

9

important languages; [T], [HX], [A], [G], [Ga], some of these language e.g. the language [A] are modal and model transitional states within transactions. E.g. 27 universal transactions at time 1 and 729 at time 2 22. These are limited and closed sets of Logically Real 'atoms' that are event descriptions between time1 and time2. Their enumeration is called 'essential numbering'.

10

TRIPARTITE MODELLING STRATEGIES. From a set of simple rules, and using the strong analogies generated, this holistic general systems theory paradigm proposes many sought after answers - a way of seeing relativity and function in a holistic and also logical way. A Universal Ohm's Law (inverse power law) and biological osmosis provide the core model for all systems. All possess some bigger energy concentration donating to a lower energy concentration through the intermediary of common medium of relativity. From within an umbrella of potential e.g. the potential difference between one site/event and another, energy passes or diffuses or discharges from a site of higher energy to one of lower energy and by that process creating the potential for another emergent system. We must first formally classify Tripartite Essentialism within the Philosophy of Science. Tripartite Essentialism is based upon the field theory notion that there is a continuous relation between one system and another through a common medium. [An inverse square relationship] i.e. A to B through some common C. There are 8 logically real versions of the integrity of that transaction at time1 and 64 at time2, further there are 27 modal logic/transitional states at time1 and 729 at time2 which model the more natural exchange of A to B through some common C with the intercession of some D. The TRE metaphysics is based upon and maps the paradigm of observed chaotic behaviour in the cosmos. This general systems theory therefore has natural chaos processes at its heart. To add to this idea is the Chaos law of Emergence, where one more massive but less sophisticated system by its more massive scales of chaos(ether) in a higher energy state feeds into and - [emerges] another more sophisticated system in our time space. This is accomplished by the transference of energy from the lesser evolved system to a site or niche of competition with another system in the same context. The product of this transference of energy or discharge is some system or artefact that is said to have emerged or filled the vacancy created by evolution and competition. In America at the Santa Fe Institute, the biological implications of this 'vacancy' were labelled as 'Morphogenetic Attractors'. This discharge or current occurs through a medium which offers resistance. There are three broad types of discharge from high to low energy. The 'electricity' of this discharge/transaction varies in the chaotic

11

physical cosmos in varying degrees of complexity and also in the metaphysics [T] as the 3 types of material complexity; where; 1. the alpha class i.e. idioms 1-3 convey energy as ether and photons, 2. the beta class i.e. idioms 4&5 where energy is bound up in and invested in mechanics of an organic nature and the 'electricity' of the discharge between two poles becomes invested in systems more teleologically sophisticated than a mere trail of electrons. e.g. water, ions and hydrocarbons etc. 3. The gamma class, idioms 6-8, employ the two previous types of 'Voltage' but also includes the additional teleological sophistication of energy being further abstracted and manipulated by types of social artefact or information meta systems. Easily measured in a simple format - as electricity, this tripartite format is known and measured in more complex, compound and crystallised (telic) energy substrates and organised and self regulating aggregates of matter - e.g. in psychological systems, which are relatively abstract systems (in comparison with a copper wire), the discharge of motivation has been measured by Lewin [1925] - unconsciously using a Tripartite principle. Kurt Lewin has developed this as a 'Field Theory in Psychology'. The Importance of Analogy. Osmosis via the exchanges of Ohms Law can be used as an analogous modelling strategy for transference at all levels of material complexity from the atomic rules of Fajan, the electronic rules of Ohm, to the psychological rules of Lewin which are all based on the inverse square power law. Osmosis is a biological term used to describe the active transport of salts from an area of high concentration to an area of low concentration through a semi-permeable membrane. The basic premise is that any system is a 'membrane' between two others. This Meso role identifies the membrane as the attenuating artefact C in the [T] transaction process. A to B through common C The structure and mechanics of membrane C pass on the 'discharge' to the site of systemic competition. Energy flowing into or being fed into the locus of components that comprise a Tripartite system finds a condition of impedance to its flow; where the original stream becomes transmuted or metabolised into those substances or effects which maintain the system's function, whether biological or physical. Given a consistent, qualitative flow, the structure can specialise on the resources of its input to exploit systems ever more different and incongruous to the energy system from which it emerged. This factor is dependent on the stress imposed externally at the site of competition between this system and its context and the competing context into which the ergonomic 'discharge' is directed - for example in the story of

12

the prehistoric evolution of amphibians where the developing respiratory mechanism of the organism enabled the exploitation of new habitat and context on the shore - this adaptation, initially, may have often failed under the critical stress of lack of humidity and high temperature. In using biological concepts as tools to interpret more general physical systems, it becomes easier to visualise Tripartite systems living in habitats, eating, metabolising and competing in a world readily accessible to the senses, and in this way, the energy that is being processed and competed for, may be more easily tracked in terms of a biological analogy through the very accessible concept of organic holism. A system becomes a system when a group of components are used consistently to receive and process energy. If consistency develops, it is because there is a context or input that caters for the collective needs of this group of components. In the macrocosm, e.g. in a fish, after feeding, the organs metabolise the input and distribute the metabolites to every part of the organisation and organism where they are used in the process of growth, competition or maintenance. Speaking more abstractly; this structure and mechanics or, supporting mechanism or metabolism, is an energy-distribution infrastructure, as often seen in civilisation as it is at the super-physical level. [Smith A, 'An enquiry into the nature and causes of the Wealth of Nations, 1776] where fine tuning of a welfare (public interest) economics strategy with the systemization of economic and industrial benefits around the strategies of the open market allegedly produced a viable society. Industry and Society and Individuals who obtained the most benefit for the least cost allegedly would be 'selected for' in terms of a social and biological Darwinism. i.e. A selection of the most efficient organisation. (as opposed to organism). In treating Civilisation as part of the set of Organic Holism, it too has a brick and mortar body powered by the metabolite of electricity obtained in the competitive jungle of Capitalism. The context of a Civilisation is its minerals, resources and materials and the processing capacity of the system itself is dependent on the efficiency of emergent tools, artefacts, processes and information with which raw materials are exploited e.g. farming, mining, factory and processing technology. The 'heart' of the nuclear reactor, pumps sustenance along the veins and arteries of its power cables, and cognisant ganglia of the stock exchanges allocate lines of trade and communication, where secondary Capital metabolites are shipped through the enormous organic system of the infrastructure in a quest for sustained growth and competition for available resources according to stimuli or Labour Market Intelligence. As in a biological system, the technological system processes and reprocesses raw input through a chain of useful and cumulative effects, investing time, capital and utility in these metabolic products. The evolutionary assets of a Civilisation are information based, where

13

the management and control of information leads through policy and science to the maximisation of output, for the minimum of input. Sustained growth and metabolism, a necessity in an entropic environment can only be maintained by the maximisation of inputs as a whole, and since the natural and universal power law is involved in the demographic and ergonomic cycles of growth and decay, the exponential demand on resources made by exponential consumption can only be maintained by correct and competitive scientific advance. At this level of complexity, the Osmosis analogy includes many more sets of artefacts, systems and formats into which the energy discharge of the context macro has been encoded. Here are a few more examples of the 'Tripartite Relativity' paradigm. In TRE every object has three aspects Three parts and a context. i.e. Part1 - Context and Macro: CMacro, Part2 - Meso, Part3 - Micro. that use analogies to describe systems both in general terms but also in physical and empirical terms. These ideas use the biological 'osmosis' model to illustrate the transaction process between high energy objects and systems to low energy objects and systems. Food, has as its context the Sun, which powers the green cycle whose Meso DNA and coding for systematic organism turns the available Carbon, Nitrogen and Phosphor in the Macro into the Micro asset of Carbohydrate Sugars and Oxygen needed to sustain the plants. This series of trophic and vegetational cycles produce a complex ecosystem and food web which becomes the macro that supplies components to another inhabitant, Man. Man extracts for the benefits of the gastronomical structure and mechanics of Man, [his Meso] energy packets of variable quality and quantity. His kitchen receptacle, when examined holistically with Tripartite Relativity has a macro or function that suits it for the context of the kitchen in design and purpose. The size of the bowl, the energy facility of the umbrella that it provides to sustain its utility - the macro or utility for the conveyance of fruit is dependent on the Man's social context. The Meso of the bowl is basically its components and structural constituents, e.g. molecular and crystalline integrity and tolerance etc, and the Micro of the bowl, basically, its evolutionary assets are its qualitative aspects e.g. if the purpose of the bowl was solely general utility, then plastic is an asset to enable continuity of function; if however, its quality is not selecting it to attain conditions of continual use e.g. porcelain bowl at a banquet may be more acceptable, then the Micro of the bowl is dependent on context conditions both qualitative and social and the amount of psychological pressure its system can 'bring to bear' or weather in the selection process. The cupboard should, like the bowl, be seen in terms of the function that makes it a specific type of cupboard, and not necessarily seen in terms

14

of the energies of its manufacture. The cupboard is the end product (Micro) of a Sawmill (Meso) that manufactures to differing qualities from forests (Macro). The context of the cupboard per se would be its overall capacity to perform its container function of holding utensils e.g. bowl. Its Meso would be its structural arrangements and partitioning and fitments and the evolutionary assets or qualitative aspects - Micro, would be the social and physical qualitative difference between Oak and MDF Hardboard, and the structural tolerances and aesthetic qualities of plastic and brass. A record player has a Macro of electricity, capital and the context and function of an information transformer. The Meso or structure and mechanics of the hardware, its choice of; materials; circuit boards, their relative component complexity and arrangements, and additional attenuations, options and facility would also have a qualitative aspect Micro, both in social status and end product of HiFi. A Book or other Media process, has as its context its topic, and a Macro also determined by the available information and physical formats and ingredients of its social source. Its Meso, or structure and mechanics are the ideologies or idea formats that collate and relate and present and explain the general relativity of the social artefact or information tool to its social context. Whereas the evolutionary asset of the book, its Micro, would be how effective and intelligent an ideological tool it was for the exploitation of the resources of the context to which its main premise was applied. A lampost has as its social context, the illumination of infrastructure for the purposes of efficient society etc, and as a Macro both the capital of taxation and the power of electricity and the facilitation of orderly social conduct, its Meso is the structure and components of the object itself, its concrete or metal, its wiring system and lighting components, and its qualitative aspects are mainly aesthetic in relation to how much light it provides, what colour, what morphology how socially designed, how high and the quality of both structure and function. A Home has as its context the housing of a family unit for the purposes of labour maintenance within the context of the infrastructure - the family or Macro will maintain the input of capital, fuel, energies, supermarkets, reservoirs, petrol, and these will be utilised by the structure and mechanics of the social context, Meso, its market efficiency, its learning and reproductive and creative potential and the degree of intelligence and efficiency to be invested in and deployed in maintaining and sustaining the fabric and quality of the social environment. The Qualitative aspects of home are related to capital input, class and other types of ideology of social fabric and aesthetic that enable evolution, expansion and successful stress free growth for the most benefit from the least cost. [Smith A, 1776] The relativity of New Particle Physics can be demonstrated by an analogy with a musical instrument the body of which is comprised of

15

sub-atomic etheric particles from whose Chaos Emerges a note or Particle. Now if this analogy holds, using our five senses, we can see the subatomic particles in the world of colours and vision and 'musical instruments', but we can only hear the Particle 'note' within the idiom of sound and because emergence is not a widely understood process, the causative link between the idiom of particle production and the particle itself could not be explained by a reductionist theory which decontextualised the particle from its reason for being. Which is why Particle Physics is today in disarray with umpteen paradoxes and anomalies like 26 mathematical dimensions to explain a superstring etc. This process of decontextualisation effectively removes a dimension or tier of relationships from rational thought because a monkey can be touched and verified and not the irrational metaphysical relationship between the monkey and the tree. Without Holism the study of the monkeys and particles is undecidable, for all the monkeys in the lab are lab monkeys, not forest monkeys in much the same way that all the particles in the particle zoo are lab particles out of the context of their natural habitat - natural relativity. What then is this canopy under which the particle zoo of bizarre hybrid particles flourish e.g. The basic laws of fluid dynamics can model energy as a fluid. It gets turbulent, the turbulence has peaks and troughs of intensity, areas of violent flux, and within this non homogenous mix, areas of calm and structure, the Strange Attractors that have become the temporary hybrid particles currently observed. Much like the Gas Giant planet Jupiter has the characteristic Red Spot, the persistent - emerged from chaos - eye of a fluid storm, the basic and unique particles themselves exist by virtue of the storm in the aether of sub-atomic energies in the Cosmos, the flux of the Essences, and amidst this chaos emerge the calm islands or nodes which are the structural fruits of flux. Philosophy of Science - notes The synthesis upon 'a priori' fact in Tripartite Essentialism is a Phenomenological event in the world of labels, but the essential relativity of such events within the physical objects themselves belongs to a Logically Complete and closed set of relativistic functions - and those functions are responsible for the fact of the noun and its ingredients. The epistemological status of Tripartite Relativity and its one basic field 'law' i.e. the inverse square law, that ties it into the operation of 'natural' and universal processes, comes from a continuous tautological relation between the components of the 3part system and their context: a discontinuous relation in this sense is a reductio, since it implies no relativity and hence no measurement or phenomenon. i.e. relativity is 'a priori' valid. All materials generated by Tripartite Essentialist formalism belong to the one basic set of 64 atomic events which physically increment by gradual

16

64 transitions to the greatest level of structure at 64. Tripartite Essentialism incorporates a field law, where a powers system is in continuous relation. In metaphysics, to categorise Tripartite Essentialism with the three main classical types of individual metaphysical distinction, produces a bit of a quandry, for [TRE] embraces all three types. The set of 64 Essential events and members are constituted Parmenidean individuals: changeless, permanent entities. The atomic stance that entails from this is that change can only come through their rearrangement. The emergence of 'structures for nothing' from the Heraclitean 'fires' as it were is described by the generative theory of causality. Where the cause is supposed to have the power to generate the effect and is connected to it. Such cause in [TRE] has a natural law of emergence observable in a continuous field as an internal relation. Whereas the succession theory of causality would hold that the phenomena observed are psychological synthesis, the 'a priori' element of the Tripartite atom creates a real connection between cause and effect and that this can be identified by a causal mechanism e.g. using Ohm's Law, a light bulb, and the application of a potential difference in energy relativity between the filament. The Primary quality of Tripartite Essentialism [T] is energy transaction. The ergonomic status of all systems, universally, is not fixed and is subject to arbitrary/chaotic change or the rearrangement of the sets of atoms and processes that comprise the system. The phenomenon of change gives rise to the secondary qualities associated with the Primary quality of flux. For example the primary quality of Ohms Law electricity generates the secondary quality of light and heat. In [T] the primary quality of the universal energy power law of mass generatesthe secondary quality of gravity and time. The emergent properties of flux can be defined in terms of: the property of the whole being produced by the properties of the parts, and that these emergent holistic properties derive from the whole structure and its context.. REFERENCES:

Here is an illustration of 'No Fixed Constants' the end of an era of Albert Einsteins fixed speed of light at 'c' unfortunately an inconvenient truth no longer available.

17

http://news.aol.co.uk/world-news/story/particle-moves-faster-than-light/1931571/?ncid=webmail1 Here are some science resources on universal chaos; http://www.ebook3000.com/Chaos-in-the-cosmos--The-stunning-complexity-of-the-universe_137092.html Sprott has a gallery of natural fractals http://sprott.physics.wisc.edu/fractals.htm http://www.miqel.com/fractals_math_patterns/visual-math-natural-fractals.html Peter plichtas tripartite theory of chemistry and mathematics Some comments http://freakyphenomena.com/comment/33806 http://uts.edu/Journals/volume-i-1997/47-book-review-igods-secret-formula-deciphering-the-riddle-of-the-universe-and-the-prime-number-codei-by-peter-plichta-rockport-ma-element-books-1997.html in the last chapter of Gods Secret Formula Plichta points out the relationship between chemistry and form in the lower animals and invertebrates

the Fulfillment of the Logical Atomism paradigm There is a substantial school of thought that can account for the reality behind my tripartite essentialist metaphysics - its called Logical Atomism. Logical atomism is a philosophical belief that originated in the early 20th century with the development of analytic philosophy. Its principal exponents were the British philosopher Bertrand Russell, the early work of his Austrian-born pupil and colleague Ludwig Wittgenstein, and his German counterpart Rudolf Carnap. [wiki] Logical Atomism is the philosophical theory of Bertrand Russell, the British philosopher (1872-1970), and the early Ludwig Wittgenstein, the Austrian-born British philosopher (1889-1951), which held that all meaningful expressions must be analysable into atomic elements which refer directly to atomic elements of the real world. [2] Tripartite Essentialism fulfils the Logical Atomism paradigm and puts it squarely back on the Philosophy agenda for the 21st Century

18

http://offtheplanet.blogspot.com/2011/12/fulfillment-of-logical-atomism-paradigm.html

The theory holds that the world consists of ultimate logical "facts" (or "atoms") that cannot be broken down any further. . Having originally propounded this stance in his Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus’ In tripartite essentialism they depict as a logical atom a three part transaction description of the form A to B through a common C – and modally, with the possible intercession of at least some context D. Where A, B, C, D are valid /integral or invalid/disintegrated at time 1 and 2 In any three part system ABC there are the eight logically real trigrams, 64 at time2 and twenty seven modal logic (including decided and undecided state) trigrams at time1 and 729 at time2. Ref. 2. Collins English Dictionary – Complete and Unabridged © HarperCollins Publishers 1991, 1994, 1998, 2000, 2003 My own contribution to the knowledge base of mankind has been around officially since 1991 and 2011 marked 20 years of it having been out there

19

Interstellar/Interdimensional Operating System TRIPARTITE ESSENTIALISM

Computers need scales of reference and sets of data upon which to base their perspective and analysis, but the problem with the Halting problem is that the measuring stick to which they refer when making judgements is infinite. These bigger more advanced quantum computers currently under development at Lockheed simply refer to more of infinity because they can process faster but they will still have the Halting problem because the way computers process knowledge addresses the labels that we give objects - and there is an infinity of labels. My system called three part essentialism creates a yard stick of finite length with a finite (essentialist) number for infinity which means that any computer using the strategy of my TRE systems theory does not have the Halting problem. Every object in the universe is seen as having a limited and finite set of internal transactions. The idea of these logical processes or 'atomic interactions' was first conceived of by Bertrand Russell and Wittgenstein in their 'Logical Atomism' in the early 1900's. With my Tripartite Essentialism or TRE, I have added a logical and computable systems theory that has no concept of infinity or the Halting problem. Another analogy with which to see what I am proposing is that the infinite universe is made up of an infinity of objects but that every object in the universe is made up out of a finite periodic table of chemistry This section presents the basis of an operating system and computational platform which would potentially be at the heart of almost every gadget or device/ship you see on star trek. The advanced semantics take the Turing (Halting) and Goedel problems of the infinite and endless recursion within computation and knowledge

20

http://offtheplanet.blogspot.com/2011/08/interstellarinterdimensional-operating.html

representation. Basically using the invented knowledge representation system and three part metaphysics, we take every transaction in infinity and assign it to one of a limited and closed series of logical Boolean transactions - and every noun, verb and adjective we have for anything can be so assigned. Then using the discovered naturally lawful 6 keys systems theory we build a model of each and every event - all events have 6 zones, within each zone we would create 6-part interacting components at various levels of detail by nesting a further 6 zones into 6 into 6 and etc until all the intrinsic detail of every interaction within the bigger event has a model. Then we would use [HX] Assembler to model and manipulate the fine detail within these events. This article comprises an introduction to tripartite essentialism. Examples of how human activity and knowledge is made tripartite in format A universal metaphysics for all such three-part exchanges The language [HX] Assembler with which to model the fine detail and context of the exchanges. An example of the language being used to model a biological event. Twenty years ago I had developed a universal and unifying metaphysics based on natural laws and processes that were programmable and manipulable via a logic language I developed. A folklore version of Tripartite Essentialism is taught as an irrationalist metaphysics degree by the Secret School of the Theosophical Society, although it requires a Hindu glossary to interpret. It is part of the occult body of work known only to a few, but is briefly referred to in the Theosophical Society’s exoteric work by HP Blavatsky called The Secret Doctrine volume 1 in the notes on the emergence from chaos in; ‘Logos, Outpouring and vehicles’. Tripartite Essentialism as written today in 2013 remains as a body of domain independent notes that require a Philosophy of Science glossary to interpret. Its products include a logical and programmable language resembling PROLOG called HX Assembler that also includes; emergence, transference and flux as inverse squared power laws. An aether and chaos/emergence based particle physics that models a solution to the collapsing wave quantum paradox along the lines of Tesla’s Theory of Environmental Energy. It has also produced the alleged Holy Grail of Artificial intelligence in that it models and overcomes the infinite recursion in computation and logic noted by Turing and Goedel that prevent fully executive robotics and therefore enables Artificial General intelligence. Tripartite Theory also rationally models teleportation using complete

21

and finite sets of essential processes to reproduce in infinite circumstances. A scanning device was also conceptualised that would utilise data maps to borrow and exchange similar processes from different maps to fill in the unknowns. This alleged isomorphism between domains is another goal of Artificial Intelligence. Before any of these alleged science fiction products could be had however, an initial expert system database with a reference system of empirical values for every object or class of object would have to be devised. Major breakthroughs based on this one ‘operating system’ became possible, overcoming the major scientific paradoxes central to the human condition. The metaphysics I called ‘tripartite essentialism’ made possible a broad spectrum of technologies and applications seen most often ‘magically’ working in programmes like ‘Star Trek’. E.g. Executive Robotics [Artificial General Intelligence] Teleportation Mind Machine Interfaces Stargate Technology and Interdimensional Travel Paradox-free Interstellar free energy engine Medical diagnostic scanner Space ships long range scanner with intelligent interpretation of any scenario A Game Theory where ‘somebody wins everything’ e.g. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iCt3NKun2Eg At the heart of the metaphysics (called tripartite essentialism) is the essence of every transaction in the universe at all scales and magnitudes. There are eight models of the one and only one universal transaction of the form A to B through a common context C Ie. Universally, logically, every transaction A to B through a common medium C can have eight and only eight forms of integrity at time 1 The story of Object A and how it functions is called ‘functional relativity’ Also Object A makes a donation of surplus energy in a competitive environment/context. A is a developed and sophisticated object or process that is capable of emerging or losing surplus from its investments or internal works C and this surplus B is its assets/qualities at B. Energy flowing from higher to lower down a gradient of exchange through its internal structures A to B through common C 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 A OBJECT High Frequency 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 1 C PROCESS 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 B QUALITY Low Frequency Surplus (Oogenic investment)

22

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iCt3NKun2Eg

In any context for a physical event or process, the physical transaction can be modelled and categorised by its high frequency components that facilitate its low frequency qualities and assets e.g. its emerged assets/seeds/investments etc ie. the process emerges some fruit or crystalises product – it is Oogenic. All physical transactions take the form ACB In tripartite metaphysics every object and event can be mapped out in natural language as noun verb and adjective of the type object process and quality/asset. The metaphysics of a universal three part exchange is given below – followed by the language [HX] Assembler which can be used to model the fine details and context within each exchange. This relativity of threeness in all natural objects of any scale the universe over can represent the nature and function of every object/event/process. Each object/event having its central core, A its governing mechanics and infrastructure C and its assets and organelles B. Further each of the three zones of any object of [1. core 2. mechanics & infrastructure and 3. evolutionary assets] may be further subdivided into 2 parts - that part of the zone which specialises in maintenance - its endogenous aspect and also that part of the zone that specialises in externally driving the other zones in context - its exogenous aspect. Therefore every object in the universe has 6 key aspects. To model natural complexity, nested large scale detailed models of 3 zone objects within 3 zone objects within 3 zone objects can be drawn up to describe more complex 3 zone objects. Every 3 zone object with 2 aspects of exogenous and endogenous per zone actually has 6 aspects and they are all directly related by a series of inverse square power law relationships. In effect each 3 zone object has 6 key aspects and this has been developed into a theory called 6 keys system theory. Every object, event, process, phenomenon the universe over at any and all scales has 6 key aspects. This fact coupled with an object frequency database that ties every and all exchanges of energy (empirical values) to their category or domain of objects enables the ‘Star Trek’ applications listed above. The development of this database is central and key to all the innovations. Also with a limited and closed series of transactions (ACB) that can describe the processes within absolutely every event in the universe at all scales - this finite number of events produces (in context) a series of finite numbers for infinity.

23

Because the infinite and unknown is tamed both in energy equations and artificial consciousness by finite reference points then such things as teleportation devices like stargates would have no problem with re-assembling complex objects and people and no artificial intelligence would ever be stuck for an answer or analysis of the unknown. All of such things are enabled by this finite logical series called 'essentialist arithmetic'. KNOWLEDGE REPRESENTATION Here are three developed examples of the TRE Knowledge Representation System being used to classify and map events in the world. These examples turn social activity into the paradigm of tripartite transactions and Boolean logic via the tripartite essentialism metaphysics There follows 3 examples [2.1 – 2.3] of the knowledge representation system. This universal knowledge representation system [KRS]can take any idiom comprised of; nouns, verbs and adjectives as; objects, processes and qualities. This [KRS] can be used to describe events at any scale and magnitude whether atomic or cosmic. This set of examples uses small business and their activity classified with this 3 part semantic system and its aspects called; [object/noun] Macro, [process/verb] Meso, [quality/adjective] Micro. 2.1. Arts - Music and Multi-Media 2.2 Industrial Manufacturing - Light Engineering 2.3 Service - Insurance MACRO. THE PHYSICAL/ATOMIC COMPONENTS OF THESE BUSINESSES ARE AS FOLLOWS. e.g. 2.1.- MACRO/OBJECT. fiddle, harp, keyboards, studio recording components, sound mixing facility, strings, CD/Tape duplicator, Minidisk, P.A. System, Transport, music stand, instrument case, tuner, lights, lighting desk, compressor, pre-amp, effects processor, microphones, stands, computer, software, peripherals etc. e.g. 2.2 – MACRO/OBJECT. lathe, metals, cutter, sweeper, shop floor clothing, gear and boots, tools, bench, drill, workshop, first aid box, lighting, storeroom, drawing/stencil board and printer, oxy-acetylene torch, arc, welding gear, trolleys, coolant, polisher/buffer, chemical solutions etc.

24

e.g. 2.3 – MACRO/OBJECT. car, clothing, suit, PC, mobile phone, hard copy filing system, stationary, photocopier, Office, computer and network peripherals, petrol, audio-visual presentation kit, overhead projector, whiteboard, laptop and modem, office furniture, briefcase, clients, customers, leaflets, potential customers etc. MESO. THE PRODUCT & MEDIA/PROCESSES AND INFRASTRUCTURE OF THESE BUSINESS 'SYTEMS'/OBJECTS ARE AS FOLLOWS. e.g. 2.1 MESO/PROCESS/INFRASTRUCTURE. - albums Celtic, albums rock, albums dance, albums story, multimedia books on CD on mysticism, hard copy tune books, logic audio recording software, concerts, performance and events supplied and tours done by company bands, new midi instruments invented, ambient and meditational video and audio’s, technical papers on new musical theories, interactive CD-ROM and multi-media package on Philosophy for Children, secure website for sale of soundfiles and other product. e.g. 2.2 MESO/ PROCESS/INFRASTRUCTURE. - oil rig parts, ship parts, motor parts, alloy parts to industrial specifications, hard alloy, soft alloy parts, thermophilic alloy, civil infrastructure components turned by spec to order, trawler maintenance, car and lorry structural repair, ad hoc building and roof components designed and manufactured by consultation. e.g. 2.3 MESO/ PROCESS/INFRASTRUCTURE. - domestic surveys, commercial property surveys, domestic and commercial policies, PEP's, Equity Investment, stock brokerage, actuary and risk assessment, bank and investment portfolios, building society and investment house policies and procedure, capital returns for business and client, Leaflets and advertising packages - multi-media, TV, radio, cinema, etc MICRO. QUALITATIVE ASPECTS OF THESE PROCESS DESCRIPTIONS e.g. 2.1 MICRO/QUALITY. - Original music/ various and diverse idioms, original story, cutting edge web site, diverse - one stop catalogue, secure for E-commerce and credit card transactions, high quality international & high tech delivery company used e.g. 2.2 MICRO/QUALITY. - parts to order, small runs - fast turnaround, good service and maintenance backup, high skill level, One-Off's, diverse projects, great experience e.g. 2.3 MICRO/QUALITY. - proven track record on investment/stock portfolio, good payout and premium record, speedy and efficient

25

processing of clients needs. The Metalanguage [T] For complex concepts to be translated into a one and zero Boolean three-part ABC system there needs to be a general and universal description that can be applied to all the states of integrity of ABC. There follows eight process descriptions for the eight tripartite ‘Boolean atoms’ /transaction models of the language [T]. These form the basis of a metaphysics for universal exchanges at all scales. These metaphysical descriptions are the large scale process models for every transaction – and the language [HX]Assembler given afterwards can be used to model the fine detail of the exchanges. 1. MACRO = 0, MESO = 0, MICRO = 0. In the system, all is in flux and there is no relativity or congruence between the context, the object and its activities. There is currently no contextual environment for the development, redevelopment or continuation of any system and the qualitative aspects of evolution within this dissonance have no emergent aspect that can be measured at this time according to current empirical process. 2. MACRO = 0, MESO = 0, MICRO = 1. The limited integrity of the past has had the qualitative capacity to emerge an asset, the Micro, but at this time now, (presently at timeX), the system has no systemic integrity. The emerged asset, though, having persisted from a previous time interlude is currently of high quality and integrity. 3. MACRO = 0, MESO = 1, MICRO = 0. The lack of supply of systemic precursors caused by the discontinuity within the context has had no detrimental effect at this time, timeX, on the integrity of the persistent systemic mechanics. The facilitation of systemic growth, though, by the Meso, has ceased because of this lapse in the supply of precursors to the systemic mechanism and therefore no new assets and tools have been produced for the evolution of the system. 4. MACRO = 0, MESO =1, MICRO = 1. The lack of systemic equilibrium and integrity due to the collapse of the precursor supply to the equilibrium from the aggregates of the context has not interrupted the integrity or persistence of the mechanical attributes within the system at timeX as it continues to emerge asset.

26

5. MACRO = 1, MESO = 0, MICRO = 0. At timeX, the present, an integrated supply of systemic precursors has emerged as an event, the Macro, but has no telic properties at timeX such that any new mechanical attributes have organised or have had such time that would have produced a qualitative asset as per conditions of observation. 6. MACRO = 1, MESO = 0, MICRO = 1. At timeX, the present, an integrated supply of systemic precursors [Macro], have emerged a qualitative event [Micro] - though the mechanics that supplied it were transparent to observation. 7. MACRO = 1, MESO = 1, MICRO = 0. At timeX, the present, the contextual supply of systemic precursors to the emergent mechanics of the Meso and its self-regulating equilibrium is of insufficient gradient, velocity and content to produce a measurable qualitative asset of any integrity under the assumed contextual conditions. 8. MACRO = 1, MESO = 1, MICRO = 1. At timeX, the present, a fully emergent, self-regulating system, producing assets of measurable qualities through viable mechanical integrity is observed to conform to the criteria of judgements imposed by the observations and criteria of systemic success. The eight descriptors, the eight tripartite atoms of the language [T] at time1, describe an event deltaT at time2, producing a set of 64 logically real essential numbers that are unique state descriptions fully describing every change of systemic integrity at time1 and time2. The one rule of assumption that drives this set of rules of derivation is that in all (universal) cases, a larger system of aggregates, universally and autonomically contributes to a smaller system through a common medium with also the intercession of at least a common other. Having a general/universal picture of how ABC relates and integrates and disintegrates is important but there also needs to be a more specific language with which to describe universal events.

27

THE LANGUAGE [HX]. INTRODUCTION: These operands are the keys to every natural process in every system. They can be platformed on e.g. C++, PROLOG, and even MIDI programming as list structures, velocity and decay form a vital part of field theory and empiricism or within Dc electrical engineering applications such as ORCAD. Characters include the Operands of Sentential and Predicate Calculus – the Languages [L] and [P], TheTripartite Languages [T], and [A] and symbols from the Microsoft Western Keyboard Fontset. 01. Unconditional Declarations e.g. If M then P1 where M and P and 1 are the alphanumeric Microsoft Western fontset utilising previously known data and previously agreed rules. 02. £ If M then not Q where not is £. i.e., £Q is not Q 03. >> if M, then it always follows that P1 is predicated, i.e. M >> P1. 04. >= greater than or equal to 05. > greater than 06. allegedly not relative [an 'a priori' false premise] 07.

object AND the context. It will denote and identify the potential for component relativity - either in the modeling of the object or its context. The material fact of physical and chemical intercession between similars absolutely always exists such that there is always a highest concentration of similar aggregate made relative to the lowest concentration of similar aggregate at a given time because of this intercession. i.e. ^Z >> ?Z, the conditions for relativity 'a priori' exist though may not at this time be active. (with a social agreement on what is 'similar') In holistic modeling, the Object and the Context have differing concentrations and differing priorities for the same compound. Thus by identifying where the highest concentrations are within the model - the relativity of exchange can be more easily tracked. 28. ~1X where ~1 identifies the macro ingredient X 29. ~2X where ~2 identifies the meso ingredient X 30. ~3X where ~3 identifies the micro ingredient X 31. [eT 01.. 64] or [eA 001.. 729] are essential numbers e for [T] and [A]. 32. t1, t2, t3, . etc where t = states relative interludes of observation. 33. * where ~1X* and ~2X* identifies the same X in 2 etc. in continual contexts of e.g. object, environment, transference etc. 34. !X where transference velocity can be; !3 macro, !2 meso, !1 micro. 35. X where conditions of over-sufficiency are being met for the emergence of a new copy or asset of X. 36. the feeding gradient [@f] for systemic (object) growth. [@g] i.e. [@f] $ [@g] = [+?], a directly related persistent field. 37. the Macro toll gradient. [@t], energy for context selfdefence. [@d] i.e. [@t] $ [@d] = [+?], a directly related persistent field. 38. the system feeding gradient [@f] and the macro toll gradient [@t], however, are inversely proportional and directly competitive to the point of mutual exclusion. i.e. [@f] $$ [@t] = [+?]. (inverse power law). 39. English separators for associative listing 1. the comma (,) and 2. the fullstop (.) as end of list. 40. English semi-colon (;) allows for an antecedent bracketed listing of arbitrary labels from social processes in various object and domain libraries. 41. English inverted commas (" X) signify degrees of structural complexity - where "1 is simple, "2 is medial, and "3 is highly complex. 42. =:= Over-sufficiency, such that (+?X), a positive transference gradient for the feeding of system X is of such persistent abundance as to facilitate the emergence of

29

replication or higher degrees of complexity and emergent systemic behaviour. 43. //# Extraneous, unexpected, migratory, modal competition during: ?, -?, +?, e.g. scales of: ~1//#X, ~2//#X, ~3//#X, and, X = (x1, x2, x3 ... xn.) 44. {G}X, {L}X : where {G} is a global context and {L} is a local context relative to some system X. 45. £$+ : the threshold level for systematic change and consistency in material proportions and behaviour. 46. %%X : where X is a general systemic organic process in which a matrix of osmotic processes of various relative transference velocities interact in various transactions of various scales and complexities. 47. =%%X : where X is a systemic process of empirically defined normative tolerances, attributes and values. 48. [SV] : shuttle value, where an organismic packet of defined ergonomic value (niche) is driven and empowered by largescale changes of state and energy. EXAMPLE: THE UNIVERSAL BIOLOGICAL ANALOG. This model is built around the use of atmospheric pressure to deliver water to the plant biology using the transpiration stream up the xylem caused by leaf metabolism and the osmotic uptake of (biologically) necessary ion aggregates from the soil by centripetal ion activity in shoots and roots. With the Biological transference Model – we have a framework example with which to now operate a more complex description at the level of a systems theory. 01. If the context aggregates Q and their changing attributes with time &Q are available as Q to the DNA script propagating to exploit them, then the evolutionary driver from Q that is Z will arrive in the plant system S at time1. With systemic structures, macro aggregate defences and enforced adaptive tolerances against usual macrotic chaos, and bridging activities with which to exploit the macro intact, the water transport system conveys the ionic packets to the plant envelope and its metabolism. where (?S) is the plant seed system and Q = environment aggregates 1a. @ Q >> #Q = ~1S, t1 1d. &t, t2 >> (~1Z = (=:=Z) + ("3Z + !3Z)) 1c. t2 = Q[@t]Z $ Q[@d]Z 1d. &t, t3 >> ((?S) + (+?S) = (=:=S) 02. The plant system S uses and mutates transport system Z and has successfully incorporated and exploited ?Z in this environmental context. Successful self-assembling aggregate S has enfolded and maintained a Z supply vacuum that exploits the process of evaporation from the tolerances within the soil and vegetation types and the

30

changes in air temperature and pressure. S has embedded itself in a persistent opportunity between massive scalar differences in the macro aggregates. Low S in the macro aggregates is feeding the assembly and emergence of high S within the plant because it is being pulled and transported by the greater and more physically abundant and reactive high Z in the macro aggregates across a massive scalar divide to massively low Z (atmosphere) in Q. 2a. &t, t4 = ((~1Z + ? + &Z) % (Q + &Q)) >> 2b. >> ( Z >> (+?S(&Z)) + (+?S(-?Z))) 2c. ~1QZ = (~1!3QZ* + ~1SZ*!2) = (+?SZ) 2d. [@f] $ [@g] 03. IF context C (atmosphere activity prevalent), where C % Q, and is greater than or equal to biological and physical plant tolerances - Optimum O, then some water Z plus other ion attributes M will be moved into the plant cytoplasm L in the plant system S at time1. 3a. S % (C % Q), t4, 3b. Q = !3Z = ?Z 3c. ((C>= O*) >> ~1+?Z + (~3*!2ZM = L) ~2S* + !3ZS ) >> 3d. >> (+?(#Z + #~2M) >> ~2L) >> ~2S*) 3e. >> (&~1Z % !~3SQ, t4) 04. Piggy-backed on the massive scalar processes (e.g. physics and physical energies) interchanging in the groundwater, hydrosphere and aeolosphere, ionic components essential for plant growth and oversufficiency create the possibility of evolutionary asset or fruit. e.g. Plant metabolism: ~1S >> ~3S, where S in ~3S is the process replication description called biological DNA, M = migrating ions, L = cytoplasmic envelope at time n. i.e. the central systemic manufacturing process of S that creates the subset (s1 .. s3) in order of; macro, meso, micro and also of scale is: S = (s1, s2, s3). In plants, these processes have primary components of operational capacity that is predicated upon structures utilizing: s1 = protein base, s2 = sugars, s3 = phosphate predicated. 4a. Q = =:=MZ, t1 4b. S = (s1, s2, s3) 4c. S + t2 + +?Q~2M = (L = (#~3M + S) + Z) = ~3S = (?S) 4d. (?S) = [@f] $ [@g] 05. In the ground G, in good conditions, the seeds start to sprout. The emergence of the external structure of the plant, E, where E % S, and includes the superstructure of the foliage F, and xylem X: - is driven by aeolian A, and phototrophic P, dictates. Persistence of temperature and light and moisture and low air pressure

31

and low turbulence will produce an over-sufficiency O, (=:=), of growth and therefore fruit. (?S). 5a. IF ~1S + (?S) % G + (+?~1Z^) + (+?P^) + (+?A^), t1 >> 5b. >> (?S) + ~2S + ~2Z + (+?S) + ("1S) = t2. 5c. t2 = ((L = (#M + #S) + ~2Z)) $$ 5d. $$ = (E = (#A + #P + ~2Z^ + F + #M) + ~3Z))) = t2. 5e. t2, IF (+?~1Z) >> ( ((L = [@f]) $$ (E = [@t])) = t3) 5f. t3 >> (+?S = (+?~2Z) + (+?~3Z)) = 5g. = (#~2MFs* + #~2MXs* + (#S(#s1, #s2, #s2), t2) + #"2S) + ~3Z. 5h. membranes roots and leaves and relative seasonal velocity 5h. t4 = +?S (s1 >> s2 + #s3) + (#"1SFX + #"2SFX) + //# 5i. t5 = +?S(s1 + s2 >> s3) + (#"2SFX + #"3SFX) + //# 5j. t6 = +?S(s1 + s2 + s3) >> ("3SFX >> (?3S) + IF£ //#) 5k. t7 = -?S( £=:=(s1 .. s3)) +V (//#) 06. At the boundaries of various membranes and other transitional zones used in 'osmosis' by aggregates, there is a relatively normative systemic toll to be paid falling within the usual tolerances of the selfregulating and self-replicating physical system. e.g. A to B through some common C with the intercession of at least some common D. However, migratory aspects of adjacent chaos can introduce other modalities and scaling conflicts into the object - context relationship. i.e. A to B through some common C with the intercession of some D that causes destructive distortion in the systemic structure, t1. Although the systemic resistance exists, depending on the degree of physical impact on the systemic defences and tolerances there will be a gradual shutdown until cessation and de-contextualisation ensues, t3. e.g. drought. (S = Plant System, Z = Pluvial and Fluvial Water) 6a. t1 = (+?~3//#~2S) + (-?!1~1Z) 6b. t2 = (?~2//#~1S) + (-?!1~1Z) 6c. t3 = (~1//#£S) + (-?!1~1Z) 07. The Plant System suffers context disruption in its feeding gradient and its metabolic bridging activities and transference gradient are compromised. Where S = (f1 .. f5), and f1;XXX and Q = (t1 .. t6) and t1;XXX are numeric values; 001 - 999. for the purposes of empirically measuring relative wavelength and frequency for the construction of social information and artefacts. 7a. +?QS, t1 7b. t1 = S([@f] $ [@p]) $$ Q([@t] $ [@d]) = [@f] $$ [@t] 7c. t2 = ~2//#S >> S(f1;075, f2;153, f3;125, f4;092, f5;085) + (£f2;153) 7d. t3 = (?~2//#~1S) + (-?!2~3Z) 7e. t2 = S(f;)(075, 000, 125, 092, 085) 7f. t4 = ?Q[@t] >> Q(t;)(t1; 150, t2;112, t3; 000, t4; 000, t5; 017, t6; 443) 7g. t5 = IF "3~3S >> (~3//#S V ~2//#S) = (-?~3S) 7h. t5 = IF "1!1~1S >> (~1//#£S)

32

7i. t5 = "3~3S >> (f1 + f2 + f3) £$$ (t1 + t2 + t3 + t6) = (&t£=:=) 7j. t5 = f;(075 + 000 + 125) = f;200, $$t;1:2 = (//#~1!S) = (f;red) 7k. t6 = ~1S(f;red) >> (f; tripartite biology domain, massive heating) 7l. t6 = //#~1S(f; geo-drought, dehydration rupture, red distortion) 7l. t0 = f;(075 + 153 + 125) = f;353, $$t;1:3 = (+?~3"3!3S) = (f;blue) 7m. t0 = f;(blue, UV) >> 7m. t0 >> (f; tripartite physics domain, diffuse atmospherics, less plant red into photosynthesis, more blue/yellow and less red/green, greater xanthophyll and less chlorophyll). 7n. t7 = IF (+?~3"3!1S) = t1 = (£f2;000) >> 7o. t7 >> //#S = //#f(~1f + ~2f + ~3f) = % Q 7p. t8 = ("2~2f2;000) + //#f >> (~1"1f2;160) = ?S 7n. The scale of f2 needed by S is nested in the larger ecosystem Q, which feeds (+?) the metabolic meso (~2S) through various layers of filtration and transportation mechanisms ("3 V "2). These eventually substantiate (=:=) the emergence of fruit or other replications, (~3S). e.g. [HX] syllogism. 7q. t9 = //#-?£f2[@d] + //#f(~1f + ~2f + ~3f) + (//#"2!1Q) >> £S V £#S 7r. t9, IF //#f;XXX = t;XXX + ~3"3!1S + £f2 >> ?S V +?S 08. The system having been breached by migratory chaos if sufficiently sturdy, complex, well stored and developed may be able to cope with variable distresses within the new orientations of the context. If it does or does not, however, is entirely unpredictable and arbitrary, as physical conditions accrue and emerge and de-merge with time and with the influence of more global activities. Some examples of systemic states for S are given below at time13 and intimations for what may or may not be possible. t13, (8g. - 8x.) for example massive scale velocity transference on massively complex, massively storing systems versus relative damage on similar systems in low scale velocity transference on simple and relatively unfortified systems. A few examples iterate the possibility of complexity and detail within the plant system 8a. SQ = S([@f] $ [@p]) $$ Q([@t] $ [@d]) = [@f] $$ [@t] 8b. t9 = ~2//#S >> S(f1;075, f2;153, f3;125, f4;092, f5;085) + (£f2;153) 8c. t9 = (?~2//#~1S) + (- !3~3Z) + (~3//#+?~1!"3Q) 8d. t10 = S(f;)(075, 000, 125, 092, 085) 8e. t11 = //#-?£f2[@d] + //#f(~1f + ~2f + ~3f) >> (£#S) + (?S) + (+?S) 8f. t12 = #S % ~1[@t]"3!3~1S + (~3//#+?~1!"3Q) + //#f(~1f + ~2f + ~3f) 8g. t13 = #S + //#f;(~1f) >> ~1!1"1-?£S + (?S) = S at timeN 8h. t13 = #S + //#f;(~1f) >> ~1!1"2-?£S + (?S) = S at timeN 8i. t13 = #S + //#f;(~1f) >> ~1!1"3-?£S + (?S) = S at timeN 8j. t13 = #S + //#f;(~1f) >> ~1!2"1-?£S + (?S) = S at timeN 8k. t13 = #S + //#f;(~1f) >> ~1!2"2S + (?S) V (+?S) V (£S) = S at timeN 8l. t13 = #S + //#f;(~1f) >> ~1!2"3S + (?S) V (+?S) V (£S) = S at timeN 8m. t13 = #S + //#f;(~1f) >> ~1!3"1S + (?S) V (+?S) V (£S) = S at timeN 8n. t13 = #S + //#f;(~1f) >> ~1!3"2S + (?S) V (+?S) V (£S) = S at timeN 8o. t13 = #S + //#f;(~1f) >> ~1!3"3S + (?S) V (+?S) V (£S) = S at timeN 8p. t13 = #S + //#f;(~1f) >> ~2!1"1S + (?S) V (+?S) V (£S) = S at timeN

33

8q. t13 = #S + //#f;(~1f) >> ~2!1"2S + (?S) V (+?S) V (£S) = S at timeN 8r. t13 = #S + //#f;(~1f) >> ~2!1"3S + (?S) V (+?S) V (£S) = S at timeN 8s. t13 = #S + //#f;(~1f) >> ~2!2"1S + (?S) V (+?S) V (£S) = S at timeN 8t. t13 = #S + //#f;(~1f) >> ~2!2"2S + (?S) V (+?S) V (£S) = S at timeN 8u. t13 = #S + //#f;(~1f) >> ~2!2"3S + (?S) V (+?S) V (£S) = S at timeN 8v. t13 = #S + //#f;(~1f) >> ~2!3"1S + (?S) V (+?S) V (£S) = S at timeN 8w. t13 = #S + //#f;(~1f) >> ~2!3"2S + (?S) V (+?S) V (£S) = S at timeN 8x. t13 = #S + //#f;(~1f) >> ~2!3"3S + (?S) V (+?S) V (£S) = S at timeN 8y. t13 = #S + //#f;(~1f) >> ~3S = (?S) V (+?S) V (£S) = S at timeN 8z. t13 = #S + ~1//#f(~1f) >> #S((-?S) V (?S) V (+?S) V (£S)) = S at timeN 8aa. t13 = #S + //#f(~2f) >> #S((-?S) V (?S) V (+?S) V (£S)) = S at timeN 8ab. t13 = #S + //#f(~3f) >> #S((-?S) V (?S) V (+?S) V (£S)) = S at timeN 8ac. t14 = #S + //#f(~2f) >> #~2S = S at timeN 09. Macro Toll Gradient [@t] is an energy toll of previously established physical and social parameters measured in and pertaining to the observed context between time1 and time2. When contextual disaster strikes though, tolerances within the system break down and release numerous breakdown products from aspects of the system and new environmental context that interfere and mix with and disrupt (or augment) previously working and stable physical relationships. e.g. ~1//#S, t1. In normative circumstances: Context Q $ S >> S([@d] $ [@t]) In abnormative disruption : 9a. t15 = //#Q $ //#S, #S >> = ?S(f2;153) at timeN 9b. t15 = £S + (//#(S[@d])) = ?S(f2;153) at timeN Within the damaged system, possibilities for recombination of simples (n) represent at the damage interphase until the unique physical tolerances of the damaged zone are either superceded and disintegrated or useful recombination and structural attenuation can present enough bridging material to repair the systemic defence [@d] such that the feeding gradient from the systemic metabolism can support [@t] the abnormative structural distress. Two similar but differently scaled systems may fare differently in a chaotic context disruption of similar magnitude. No modeling assertion could be absolutely true in a chaotic universe though. examples s1 and s2, where s1(mature) + s2(young) % S s1 = !3ZS(~1X"3~1F"2) mature plant in emergent growing season s2 = !3ZS(~3X"1~3F"1) young plant in emergent growing season 9a. t14 = //#-?£f2[@d] + //#f(~1f + ~2f + ~3f) >> (£#S) + (?S) + (+?S) 9b. t14 = #S % ~1[@t]"3!3~1S + (~3//#+?~1!"3Q) + //#f(~1f + ~2f + ~3f) In this system S, values for fn at; macro (~1fn) = 500 - 1000 meso (~2fn) = 50 - 100 micro (~3fn) = 1 - 10 In the context //#Q, however, disruption at (~1fn) has caused systemic failure such that the velocity of the normative rate of supply is now insufficient to supply enough systemic defences to slow down the rate

34

of systemic disintegration. Some complex systems can still function and retain some damage within their structure. In the context Q, normatively, the upper and lower tolerances of competition on [@d], lie within the range of [800 - 1200] where [ £S) V (#//#Q >> #S(s1.x));(S,phenotypes, 10a. tn = properties.x) 10b. t23 = !1ZS(~1X"3~1F"1), xs1.1;(deluge, mature root and xylem, 10b. t23 = bad foliage). 10b. t23 = !1ZS(~1X"2~1F"3), xs1.2;(deluge, mature root and xylem, 10b. t23 = excellent foliage). 10b. t23 = !1ZS(~1X"1~1F"1), xs1.3;(deluge, mature/decayed root 10b. t23 = and xylem, bad foliage). 10c. t24 = @//#Q = (-?s(1.1 + 1.2)) V (?s(1.1 + 1.2)) + £(s1.3) 10d. t25 = @//#Q!1Z >> S = (£X)x;(deluge, root dislocation, £[@f]) 10e. t25 = IF @//#Q = t26 >> (s1.2 > s1.1) + (!1~1Z) + #(?s(1.2>1.1)) 10f. t25 = IF @//#Q = t27 >> (s1.2 < s1.1) + (!1~1Z) + #(?s(1.1>1.2)) 10e. t26 = !1Z@//#QSs >> #~3Q,x;(optimum temperature and light, 10e. t26 = £[@f]) 10f. t27 = !1Z@//#QSs >> #~1Q,x;(extreme temperature and light, £[@f]) 10g. t27 = f2 % &Q = (q1, q2, q3, q4, Q(1-n), ~1Z) > @(~2S + ~3S) 10h. t27 = #(~1S) = f2 % (q1, q4) 10i. t27 = @Q % &W = (W1, W2, w1, w2, w3, w4 ...wn)

35

10i. t27 = W;(tectonics, volcanism, tsunami) = &Q(~1!1{G} + ~1!1{L}) 10i. t27 = W;(Richter, Geochemistry, Salinity + Temp) >> $$[@t]s 10j. t28 = W1 $$ W2 >> @//Q (q1 $$ q4) >> f2 + (&~1!1"1Q) + (#QSs) 10k. t28 = (!1W1 $$ !1W2 >> =:= {G}@w + #{L} >> (q1 $$ q4) 10l. t29 = #~3{L} >> #~3(f2) >> #{L}Ss = (=:= + ?Ss) The objects and labels within this event description are interchangeable between similar events in different domains. E.g. function, malfunction, systemic integrity and disintegrity in the ‘fruiting’ process in other systems and outcomes.

36

TRIPARTITE ESSENTIALISM - and its EXPERT SYSTEM Three part Essentialism For an AI computer to map, model and think about the universe it has to have knowledge about the universe represented to it logically in a classification system with general terms that are not arbitrary. Better, the computer requires to process data and empirical values to give it a sense of exactly what it is dealing with – and this it can do with sensors. If the computer can classify objects in its universe by physical values e.g. in terms of scales of energy (e.g. giga volts, volts, millivolts etc) and if it has a series of maps that tell it how objects at all scales and in all situations perform and relate, and these maps are constructed out of one general systems paradigm, then if it ever comes across an unknown in some domain it is operating in e.g. astronomy and cosmology – the macrocosm it can then scale up the logical values and ratios and models of relationships from a domain in the microcosm such as marine biology to model a solution to its more cosmic unknowns. This is called isomorphism between domains and can be achieved within the Tripartite Essentialism paradigm. Without modelling with TRE – Turing’s ‘Halting Problem’ would confuse the computation process by objects described by an infinity of unrelated and arbitrary labels. http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Systems_Theory/Isomorphic_Systems TRE has the general systems theory [6 keys systems theory] and mapping, knowledge representation system [TREES] and specialised language [HX PROLOG] to query and instruct the database and maps. At the heart of the metaphysics (called tripartite essentialism) is the essence of every transaction in the universe at all scales and magnitudes. There are eight models (that are 'logically real') of the one and only universal transaction of the form A to B through a common context C [However, including undecided/modal states at time 1 - the definition can also be A to B through a common C with the intercession of at least one D - there are 27 three part descriptions which include those extra undecided or modal states] Ie. Universally, logically, every transaction A to B through a common medium C can have eight and only eight forms of integrity at time 1 The state description of Object A and how it functions relates how it functions and how integrated and effective it is at any given time. Also Object A makes a donation of surplus energy in a competitive environment/context. A is a developed and sophisticated object or

37

http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Systems_Theory/Isomorphic_Systems

process that is capable of emerging or losing surplus from its investments or internal works C and this surplus B is its assets/qualities at B. Energy flowing from higher to lower down a gradient of exchange through its internal structures A to B through common C 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 A OBJECT High Frequency 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 1 C PROCESS 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 B QUALITY Low Frequency Surplus (Oogenic investment) TRE uses organic models in a general systems theory with which to map the universe and its behaviour at all scales and in all contexts. In any context for a physical event or process, the physical transaction, the essential exchange, can be modelled and categorised by the properties of its high frequency components that then emerge and facilitate its low frequency qualities and assets e.g. its emerged assets/seeds/investments etc ie. the process is Oogenic - seed making/crystallising/telic. All physical transactions take the form ACB TRE in natural and logical language has objects or nouns, processes or verbs and qualities/assets or adjectives. In tripartite metaphysics every object and event can be mapped out in natural language as noun verb and adjective of the type object process and quality/asset. The metaphysics of a universal three part exchange is given below - followed by the language [HX] Assembler which can be used to model the fine details and context within each exchange. An essence characterizes a substance or a form, in the sense of the Forms or Ideas in Platonic idealism. It is permanent, unalterable, and eternal; and present in every possible world. Classical humanism has an essentialist conception of the human being, which means that it believes in an eternal and unchangeable human nature. Essentialism, in its broadest sense, is any philosophy that acknowledges the primacy of Essence. Unlike Existentialism, which posits "being" as the fundamental reality, the essentialist ontology must be approached from a metaphysical perspective. Empirical knowledge is developed from experience of a relational universe whose components and attributes are defined and measured in terms of intellectually constructed laws. The three part essences describe the integrity of the exchange at time 1 and at time 2 ie. whether the objects, its process and its quality are in an integrated or disintegrated state and can resemble Boolean logic. This kind of knowledge about the three part states is a priori or synthetic a priori. The terms a priori ("from the earlier") and a posteriori ("from the later") are used in philosophy (epistemology) to distinguish two types of knowledge, justifications or arguments. A priori knowledge or justification is independent of experience (for example "All bachelors

38

are unmarried"); a posteriori knowledge or justification is dependent on experience or empirical evidence (for example "Some bachelors are very happy"). A posteriori justification makes reference to experience; but the issue concerns how one knows the proposition or claim in question-what justifies or grounds one's belief in it. Galen Strawson wrote that an a priori argument is one in which "you can see that it is true just lying on your couch. You don't have to get up off your couch and go outside and examine the way things are in the physical world. You don't have to do any science."[1] There are many points of view on these two types of assertions, and their relationship is one of the oldest problems in modern philosophy. The terms "a priori" and "a posteriori" are used in philosophy to distinguish two different types of knowledge, justification, or argument: 'a priori knowledge' is known independently of experience (conceptual knowledge), and "a posteriori knowledge" is proven through experience. Thus, they are primarily used as adjectives to modify the noun "knowledge", or taken to be compound nouns that refer to types of knowledge (for example, "a priori knowledge"). However, "a priori" is sometimes used as an adjective to modify other nouns, such as "truth". Additionally, philosophers often modify this use. For example, "apriority" and "aprioricity" are sometimes used as nouns to refer (approximately) to the quality of being "a priori". The status of TRE and its before the fact (a priori) essentialist states introduces certainty into its applications. This means that limited and closed sets of numbers with which to represent the infinite will enable any computation based on these TRE numbers to overcome the Halting problem. The following is some background to the Halting problem which basically states that various thinkers have pronounced in insoluble !! In computability theory, the halting problem can be stated as follows: Given a description of an arbitrary computer program, decide whether the program finishes running or continues to run forever. This is equivalent to the problem of deciding, given a program and an input, whether the program will eventually halt when run with that input, or will run forever. Alan Turing proved in 1936 that a general algorithm to solve the halting problem for all possible program-input pairs cannot exist. A key part of the proof was a mathematical definition of a computer and program, what became known as a Turing machine; the halting problem is undecidable over Turing machines. It is one of the first examples of a decision problem. The halting problem is historically important because it was one of the first problems to be proved undecidable. (Turing's proof went to press in May 1936, whereas Alonzo Church's proof of the undecidability of a problem in the lambda calculus had already been published in April 1936.) Subsequently, many other undecidable problems have been

39

described; the typical method of proving a problem to be undecidable is with the technique of reduction. To do this, it is sufficient to show that if a solution to the new problem were found, it could be used to decide an undecidable problem by transforming instances of the undecidable problem into instances of the new problem. Since we already know that no method can decide the old problem, no method can decide the new problem either. Often the new problem is reduced to solving the halting problem. For example, one such consequence of the Halting problem's undecidability is that there cannot be a general algorithm that decides whether a given statement about natural numbers is true or not. The reason for this is that the proposition stating that a certain program will halt given a certain input can be converted into an equivalent statement about natural numbers. If we had an algorithm that could solve every statement about natural numbers, it could certainly solve this one; but that would determine whether the original program halts, which is impossible, since the halting problem is undecidable. Rice's theorem generalizes the theorem that the halting problem is unsolvable. It states that any non-trivial property of the partial function that is implemented by a program is undecidable. (A partial function is a function which may not always produce a result, and so is used to model programs, which can either produce results or fail to halt.) For example, the property "halt for the input 0" is undecidable. Note that this theorem holds only for properties of the partial function implemented by the program; Rice's Theorem does not apply to properties of the program itself. For example, "halt on input 0 within 100 steps" is not a property of the partial function that is implemented by the program-it is a property of the program implementing the partial function and is very much decidable. Gregory Chaitin has defined a halting probability, represented by the symbol O, a type of real number that informally is said to represent the probability that a randomly produced program halts. These numbers have the same Turing degree as the halting problem. It is a normal and transcendental number which can be defined but cannot be completely computed. This means one can prove that there is no algorithm which produces the digits of O, although its first few digits can be calculated in simple cases. While Turing's proof shows that there can be no general method or algorithm to determine whether algorithms halt, individual instances of that problem may very well be susceptible to attack. Given a specific algorithm, one can often show that it must halt for any input, and in fact computer scientists often do just that as part of a correctness proof. But each proof has to be developed specifically for the algorithm at hand; there is no mechanical, general way to determine whether algorithms on a Turing machine halt. However, there are some heuristics that can be used in an automated fashion to